Human Rights Alert - NGO page counter
Our right to access public records, our Liberty and our fundamental Human Rights are all connected at the hips!

Why was this blog created?

All further in-house efforts to further justice in the US justice system are futile. These efforts are only worthwhile to the degree that they provide additional documentation of the widespread corruption of the US justice system.

Our focus must be on the international community.

In November 2010 the United Nations will review for the first time ever the Human Rights record of the United States. Corruption of the justice system was the core of reports filed by Human Rights Alert and others for the April 2010 deadline.

In August 2010 the US State Department is scheduled to respond on the reports, and in November 2010 the UN will conduct the review session and issue the report, and set goals, which the US would be asked to reach between 2010 and the next scheduled review in 2014.

Between now and November 2010, we must focus on informing and lobbying the nations that sit on the review panel, to ensure that the most effective report is issued.

This blog was created in hope that the German Federal Government would support a UN UPR report that calls upon the US federal government to provide equal protection under the law to all who reside in the United States.

Please call or write your elected representatives and ask that the German Government support in November 2010 the issuance of a UPR report by the United Nations, which calls upon the US government to abide by its duties and responsibilities pursuant to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – ratified international law.

Bitte rufen Sie an oder schreiben Sie Ihrem gewählten Vertreter. Fragen Sie, ob die deutsche Regierung im November 2010 die Ausstellung eines UPR Bericht der Vereinten Nationen unterstuetzt.

Bitte unterzeichnen Sie die Petition - Richard Fine zu Befreien

RICHARD FINE was arrested on March 4, 2009 and is held since then in solitary confinement in Twin Tower Jail in Los Angeles, California, with no records,  conforming with the fundamentals of the law, as the basis for his arrest and jailing.

Richard Fine - 70 Jahre alt, ehemaliger US-Staatsanwalt, hatte gezeigt, dass die Richter in Los Angeles County "nicht zulässig" Zahlungen angenommen hatten (von den Medien "Bestechungsgelder" genannt). Am 20. Februar 2009 unterzeichnete der Gouverneur von Kalifornien "rückwirkende Immunität" (Verzeihung) für alle Richter in Los Angeles. Weniger als zwei Wochen später, am 4. März 2009, wurde Richard Fine in einer öffentlichen Sitzung verhaftet, ohne Gerichtlichen beschluss. Er ist seitdem in Einzelhaft in Los Angeles, Kalifornien; es ist weder ein Urteil noch eine Verurteilung ergangen.

Bitte unterzeichnen Sie die Petition - Richard Fine zu Befreien:

Donnerstag, 29. Juli 2010

10-07-29 Weitere Beweise für Betrug bei der US Supreme Court, in re: Richard Fine

William Suter
Clerk of the US Supreme Court

Additional Evidence for Fraud at the US Supreme Court, in re: Richard Fine 
Los Angeles, July 29 - Human Rights Alert (BGO) released additional evidence of fraud at the US Supreme Court in re: Richard Fine v Lerory Baca, Sheriff of Los Angeles County (09-A827) - application for stay of execution of ongoing solitary confinement.  Records recently retrieved from the US Supreme Court file in the case failed to discover any valid court records supporting the purported denial of the Application in the Supreme Court Conference either on April 23, 2010, as scheduled, or on April 26, 2010, as noted in the online Supreme Court docket. [1] Court records also failed to show any record of service and notice to the parties of the purported denial.  Information obtained from the imprisoned former US prosecutor Richard Fine, likewise, indicated that he had never received any notice and service at all of the purported denial.

The Application was first submitted to Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy.  The online Court docket noted denial by Justice Kennedy on March 12, 2010, and Richard Fine received a notice to that effect as well.  However, the notice was by Counsel Danny Bickell, who was not authorized as a Deputy Clerk. Moreover, the notice was unsigned, and the copy in Court file was never stamped "FILED". Furthermore, there was no valid record of denial by Justice Kennedy to form the legal foundation for such notice. 

Former US prosecutor Richard Fine then re-submitted the Application to Associate Justice Ruth Ginsburg, who in turn referred it to the US Supreme Court conference, scheduled for April 23, 2010.

Prior to the April 23, 2010, Mr Danny Bickell, again - with no authority at all, eliminated from the court file records filed in the case, which included evidence, including, but not limited to details of his March 12, 2010 invalid notice of denial by Justice Kennedy.  Mr Bickell's conduct relative to the March 12, 2010 notice and the consequent elimination of records from the Court file was subject of a complaint filed with US Attorney Office, Washington DC.

On April 23, 2010, outcome of the conference remained unknown.  However, an April 26, 2010 note in the US Supreme Court online docket, [1] indicated denial of the Application.  The records, which were obtained on July 26, 2010 from the Court file, showed no legal foundation at all for the April 26, 2010 denial note in the online Court docket.

Therefore, it was alleged that the case documented the repeated publication of false and deliberately misleading notes in the online US Supreme Court docket, the issuing of false notices by unauthorized US Supreme Court staff relative to the purported March 12, 2010 denial by Justice Kennedy, and failure of the US Supreme Court Justices to dispose of matters before them.

Former US prosecutor Richard Fine exposed, publicized, and rebuked the taking by judges in Los Angeles County of "not permitted" payments ("bribes"), which necessitated the signing on February 20, 2009 of "retroactive immunities" ("pardons") for all such judges.  Since March 4, 2009, he has been imprisoned in solitary confinement in Los Angeles, California.  Albeit, no warrant was ever issued, and no judgment/ conviction/ sentencing was ever entered in his case.

The case of Richard Fine documented a pattern of publication of false records in online public access systems, and denial of access to true judicial records:
1)      The Los Angeles Superior Court - published a false online "Case Summary", but denied access to the Register of Actions (California civil docket) in the case management system of the court in the case.
2)      The Sheriff of Los Angeles County - published false online arrest and booking records in its "Inmate Information Center", but denied access to the true Los Angeles County Booking Record of Inmate Richard Fine.
3)      The US District Court, Los Angeles - published a false online "PACER docket", but denied access to the NEFs (Notices of Electronic Filing - the authentication records) in the case, and the paper record, which was Richard Fine's commencing record - the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which was allegedly adulterated at the US District Court.
4)      The US Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit - published a false online "PACER dockets", but denied access to the NDAs (Notices of Docket Activity - the authentication records), and also to critical records filed by respondents in the appeal.
5)      The US Supreme Court - published a false online "docket" noting March 12, 2010 and April 23/26, 2010 denials, which were not supported by the Court records in the case.  Access to true dockets in the case management system of the Supreme Court was yet to be permitted.

Notice of the newly discovered records of the US Supreme Court was also submitted to the US State Department and the United Nations.  Review of such conduct by the courts was sought by Human Rights Alert as part of the pending review of Human Rights in the United States in the first ever UPR (universal periodic review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations scheduled for November 2010.  The April 2010 UPR report by Human Rights Alert, alleged large-scale fraud in online public access and case management systems of the courts in the United States. The report called for publicly and legally accountable validation of such systems.

Human Rights Alert is dedicated to discovering, archiving, and disseminating evidence of Human Rights violations by the justice systems in Los Angeles County, California, and beyond. Special emphasis is given to the unique role of online public access and case management systems in the precipitous deterioration of integrity of the justice system in the United States.

[1] 10-07-28-RE-Fine-v-Baca-09-A827-Additional-Evidence-for-Fraud-at-the-US-Supreme-Court-pertaining-to-purported-denial-of-the-Application-in-Confe
[2] Alleged fraud in US Supreme Court records in Fine v Baca (09-A827)

[3] Complaint against US Supreme Court Counsel Danny Bickell Alleged Public Corruption and Deprivation of Rights

Joseph Zernik, PhD

Human Rights Alert (HRA), NGO
Human Rights Alert - NGO  
*     "Innocent people remain in prison"
*     "...the LA Superior Court and the DA office, the two other parts of the justice system that the Blue Panel Report recommends must be investigated relative to the integrity of the system, have not produced any response that we know of..."LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006) [i]
"...judges tried and sentenced a staggering number of people for crimes they did not commit." Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2000) [ii]
"This is conduct associated with the most repressive dictators and police states... and judges must share responsibility when innocent people are convicted."     Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2000) [iii]
[i] LAPD Blue Ribbon Review Panel Report (2006)
[ii] Paper by Prof David Burcham, Dean, Loyola Law School, LA (2001)
[iii] Paper by Prof Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean, Irvine Law School (2001)

April 19, 2010 Human Rights Alert submission for the 2010 UPR (Universal Periodic Review) of Human Rights in the United States by the United Nations:
a) Press Release:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30200004/b) Submission:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30147583/c) Appendix:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30163613/d) UPR Tool Kit by the Urban Justice Center:

Keine Kommentare:

Kommentar veröffentlichen